Casual analysis and short‐sighted inferences: A response to Majgaonkar et al. 2019
Abstract The increased interface of humans and large carnivores in human‐modified landscapes requires mechanisms to reduce conflict and allow co‐existence. The recent article by Majgaonkar et al. examining land‐sharing potential of the Western Ghats overlooks some important points in their analyses...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2019-12-01
|
| Series: | Conservation Science and Practice |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.124 |
| Summary: | Abstract The increased interface of humans and large carnivores in human‐modified landscapes requires mechanisms to reduce conflict and allow co‐existence. The recent article by Majgaonkar et al. examining land‐sharing potential of the Western Ghats overlooks some important points in their analyses and inferences. Poorly designed occupancy survey with improper replicates has produced results that can have a misguided bearing on large‐carnivore conservation and management in the region. Inaccurate results do not help in prioritization of conservation areas and sketchy conclusions create a perception that carnivore conservation is possible without addressing the pressing issues of development and land‐use modifications. We urge future studies to rigorously evaluate their methodologies and ensure better practices for science‐based conservation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2578-4854 |